Laserfiche WebLink
TUESDAY, MAY 28, 1991 <br />reported ~that 11 individuals under the City Manager's jurisdiction have <br />started the procedure for retiring under the early retirement program. Of <br />the 11 positions, 4.5 will not be replaced. Mr. Brown stated that the City <br />would not get the full positive effect of these retirements for FY91-92 <br />because their retirement dates range from July 1 to Octoberl, 1991. Mr. <br />Brown said that $79,025 of the early retirement savings had been included in <br />his original budget presented to Council. Mr. Brown presented written <br />information which demonstrated additional changes in the Proposed Budget <br /> <br />since the last report given to Council (May 6, 1991). Mr. Brown said that <br />all~of the changes since the May 6 report were~'reia~ea~t~ '~h~e eariy <br />retirement program except for the reduction of General Fund revenue of <br />$53,610 in "599" State funds, a reduction in contribution from Surplus in the <br />Sewer Fund of $36,381, an increase of $8,500 in the General Fund to cover the <br />City's portion of the joint court facilities study, and a reduction in <br />expenditures in the Sewer Fund of an equal amount ($36,381), which results <br />from the reduction by one in the number of employees requested by Water <br />Resources. Mr. Brown stated that the net result of the changes was to <br />increase the General Fund projected balance as of 6/30/92 from $241,469 to <br />$263,233 and to decrease the Sewer Fund projected balance as of 6/30/92 from <br />$428,308 to $424,856. The Sewer Fund change resulted from the reduction in <br />personnel and final value of the buy-back by the City of a part of the PSA's <br />capacity in the City's Water Pollution Control Plant. <br /> <br />Mr. Brown, in commenting on the early retirement program, stated that he felt <br />the program gave the City opportunities to reorganize and to make personnel <br />changes which will be beneficial over the long term. Mr. Brown noted that <br />the City would not be asked to increase its contribution to VRS during FY91- <br />92 and therefore the savings would not be offset by a cost for increased <br />contribution during FY91-92. Mr. Brown said that he had verified with VRS <br /> <br /> <br />